forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Crossley <>
Subject Re: [PMC] change the procedure for new committers
Date Wed, 17 Aug 2005 07:57:55 GMT
Ferdinand Soethe wrote:
> David Crossley wrote:
> > Now all that waiting causes problems, e.g. Cyriaque's case
> > had successful vote, but we cannot yet announce it to the
> > dev list.
> I didn't follow Cyriaque's case closely so I'm not sure what problem
> this creates, could you explain this please.

It takes such a long time before the procedure
is finished and all PMC members need to keep quiet
about it until the end. In this case two of us
accidently talked about Cyriaque becoming a committer.
We still have not announced to the dev list that he
is a new committer/PMC member.

I am on a constant drive to talk as little as possible
on the private PMC mailing list. This gives the impression
that we talk a lot in private, and we don't want that
false impression.

Thoughout that whole procedure, the new committer needs
to send email to the PMC list about any queries.
That should all happen in the open.

> > It would be better if we could announce them to dev@ list
> > at step 3 and just say that there are more procedural steps
> > which will take some time.
> [...]
> > What if the board denied them being a PMC member?
> > I cannot see why they would, but that procedural step
> > still needs to happen.
> If this does not happen, why is this part of the procedure still in
> place. As it is I'd not (0) be in favour of just jumping it because of
> the complications involved if they choose to exercise their right to
> deny them membership.

I gather that it is an official requirement for a corporation
(the ASF is a non-profit corporation) that the board needs
to acknowledge the addition/removal of committee members.
I use dthe wrong words above. I don't think that it is
anything to do with denying a person to become a member,
though i could be wrong.

> How about starting a motion to do away with this step or else
> simplify procedure (why does it need to wait for step 5 so that it
> doesn't get delayed).

As above, we cannot delete that board acknowledgement step.

It needs to wait for step 5 because we need to know the
committer username to tell the board and add to


View raw message